fatcat's computer

[fatcat]

so, I finally stopped being lazy and bought the parts to build a PC.

Case: Antec 300 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811129042)

Power Supply: OCZ PC Power & Cooling 610w (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817703005)

Motherboard: DFI LANPARTY DK P35-T2RS (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813136043)

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 Wolfdale 3.0GHz 6MB (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115037)

Heatsink: Noctua NH-U9B (http://icrontic.com/articles/noctua_nh-u9b)

RAM: OCZ Platinum Edition 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1000 (PC2 8000) 2 kits (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227280)

Video: Asus Radeon HD 4850 512MB Overclocked 680/2100 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121272)

Hard Drive: Seagate 500GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148288)

DVD: Lite-On 20x DVD +/- (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827106228)

Monitor: Still looking....probably a 20" or 22" 1680x1050

OS: WindowsXP 64 Bit

Keyboard: OCZ Alchemy Series Elixir (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16823227001)

Mouse: Logitech G5

Speakers: Still looking...

finally my iMac will get to use OSX instead of WinXP/TF2 all the time ;)

[mas0n]

nice picks. :cheers:

[TBonZ]

I'd say that will work for you.:thumbup

As for the screen, I just picked up two 24" Samsung SyncMaster's 2443BW for $319.99+tx (CDN) each.

http://pccyber.com/?v=product&i=LCD-SA-2443BW - $372.00 reduced to $319.99.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001294&Tpk=2443bw

Jeezus, $429.99 American at NewEgg?! I'm sure you can find this model for less somewhere else if we are getting this price. I tell you though, after upgrading from my single 22", I can tell you with certainty, this model is leaps and bounds above my previous monitor.

[Buddy J]

Nice. That's a hell of a lot of RAM.

[fatcat]

Nice. That's a hell of a lot of RAM.

4GB for $58, why the hell would I not get the max ;)

[Leonardo]

If you are putting up the money for a new system, do not skimp with a 20" monitor. 22" minimum. If you get a 20", within six months you'll be kicking yourself, wondering why you didn't wait just a bit longer to save the money for a larger monitor. Highly recommend 24". They aren't so expensive anymore, unless you need the best of the best. BTW, some of the TN panels are very, very good, unless you need to be looking at them angles greater than 130 degrees.

[Thrax]

For monitor reviews, I would again like to plug www.digitalversus.com and www.behardware.com. Nobody does it better than those two sites.

[jared]

hmmm a little bit more power than the stimulus PC I was looking at :\

[UPSLynx]

I give very high marks to HP's w2207 22inch LCD display. It's the one I brought to the LAN. My display doesn't have any dead pixels, very little backlight bleed. 5ms response time isn't the best, but when I compared it side by side with the Samsung 22inch rated at 3ms, the HP performed better with blur and vibrancy in colors.

But definitely do the research. I picked this display more so for colors than gaming performance for my animation/CG work.

Great rig though, gotta love that RAM.

[NiGHTS]

Another vote for the 2207, the colors are made much more vibrant with the gloss screen cover, IMO.

[fatcat]

the reason I'm leaning towards a 20" or 22" is because I don't think the ATi 4850 can push fast frame rates(60+) AND all the eye candy @ 1920x1200. this is why I'm sticking with 1680x1050.

[Thrax]

22" monitors are still 1680x1050. Even then, 35+ FPS is fine. 60+ is nice, but not necessary.

[fatcat]

22" monitors are still 1680x1050. Even then, 35+ FPS is fine. 60+ is nice, but not necessary.

yea thats what i mean, 24" monitors are 1920x1200 or 1920x1080 which i think the 4850 might struggle on on upcoming games. i dont want to use resoultions other than default.

[=MBG= De Sniper]

Logitech G5 mouse owns good choice!!!!

[jared]

so ~how much is this setting you back all in all, if someone else wanted t build one similar ;)

[fatcat]

so ~how much is this setting you back all in all, if someone else wanted t build one similar ;)

Case: $60
PSU: $68
Mobo: $140
CPU: $165
Heatsink: Free, won @ ICLAN
RAM: $58 for 4GB, other 4GB is classified ;)
Video: $150
Hard Drive: $55
DVDR: $22
Monitor: Haven't chosen one yet
OS: once again, classifed
Keyboard: Free (<3 Snarkasm)
Mouse: Free
Speakers: haven't chosen yet

$718 so far....remember I used newegg promo codes also to get these prices.

[UPSLynx]

Love me some w2207

Also, G5. EXCELLENT mouse, best I've ever used. You got the V2, right?

[fatcat]

Love me some w2207

Also, G5. EXCELLENT mouse, best I've ever used. You got the V2, right?

nope, the orange original one ive had for awhile now. I might get the newer one down the road.

[bullzisnipr]

I would've gone with Q6600... I had an E8400 and kicked myself then traded with Gnome to get his Q6600. :p

[fatcat]

I would've gone with Q6600... I had an E8400 and kicked myself then traded with Gnome to get his Q6600. :p

why would I want a quad core that is lower speed/fsb and higher watts/heat and costs more?

[bullzisnipr]

Because in games that support multi core processors, the Q6600 is much more efficient. Almost every game coming out these days supports multi core processors and most old ones do too. For example, when I had my E8400 overclocked to 3.8Ghz and was playing UT3, both cores were running at 90+%. With my Q6600 each core runs 60-70%. For gaming these days, Q6600 is certainly the way to go.

[Snarkasm]

If it's not running at 100% and locking, what's the difference?

[bullzisnipr]

My point is, it's a current game which is already using almost all of the E8400's power. (I say this knowing that UT3 is EXTREMELY dependent on the CPU.) Q6600 is just a few bucks more, why not go quad? Unless he's really that concerned about heat and energy consumption (some have valid reasons) I see no reason why not to. Games will run so much better on the quad.

For the argument that not all games use 4 cores. Can you think of a game that uses two cores to the max? (that isn't quad core capable like UT3) A Q6600 will perform equally compared to an E8400 for those older games that don't use all 4 cores. Aside from UT3, I can't think of a single older game that would max out two cores of the Q6600.

Seriously though, go quad. Unless power consumption is something you're trying to watch, there's no reason not to. All games these days ship with quad core capable engines, why not use them? Why keep yourself limited in dual core when for a few bucks more you could have 4 cores?

[Leonardo]

bullzisnipr, you need to define "multi core" in the context of gaming. It my understanding that multicore-compiled games usually are designed for dual-core CPUs, not quads.

Don't get me wrong, I think the Q6600 is an absolutely awesome beast! I have five computers running them. In my case though, the CPU choice was influence first by Folding@Home capability, second by overclocking ability, and third by price. The Q6600 scored very highly in all three of those priorities for me. If I were not a dedicated Folding@Home donor, I probably would have gone with a competitive dual core CPU.

Really, at the consumer level, there are very few applications that will make efficient use of more than two cores.

[bullzisnipr]

The back of the new game "Crysis Warhead" says "multi-core capable" it will fully utilize 4 cores. Sure I completely agree that the Q6600 is overkill for an average consumer, but its 10 bucks more! Why have games that almost use the E8400 now, when for $10 more you can't have anything close to a stutter. Not to mention, nobody on here is an "average consumer", we're enthusiasts, always trying to gain a step up. :p

[Winfrey]

why would I want a quad core that is lower speed/fsb and higher watts/heat and costs more?

For folding, duh! Aren't you just going to dedicate your brand spanking new machine to curing diseases?:tongue:

[fatcat]

I play TF2 on an iMac.

[Buddy J]

Lets see...

Q6600 = 2.4 Ghz x 4 cores = 9.6 ePeens
E8400 = 3 Ghz x 2 cores = 6 ePeens

Obviously the E8400 is the best. ;)

[Leonardo]

Q6600 is overkill for an average consumer, but its 10 bucks moreI haven't looked at CPU prices in a while. $10 difference? Wow, that's nothing! Yeah, I see your point. If the price points are that close, might as well get the quad core.

EDIT: Alright, I'm lost here. What the heck is an "ePeen?" Virtual urinating?

[Thrax]

I actually suggest a Xeon 7460.

[Leonardo]

Tell me more. (about the 7460) I could look it up, but why, when Thrax can render an excellent summary. :)

[fatcat]

the Q6600 was $25 more than the E8400

[Thrax]

Tell me more. (about the 7460) I could look it up, but why, when Thrax can render an excellent summary. :)

It's just Intel's six core, Penryn-based, $900-$2700 super-chip for the Caneland platform. Totally viable. ;)

[bullzisnipr]

the Q6600 was $25 more than the E8400

My apology, I was referring to the OEM version of the Q6600 since you had selected a CPU cooler.

Newegg Prices
E8400 Retail: $169
Q6600 OEM: $179

@ Thrax, yea man, totally viable here. :rockon: Can't wait till the day I can actually afford that.. :rolleyes:

[Leonardo]

Can't wait till the day I can actually afford that.. Nah, it's just like all things tech - just wait half a year and the price is very reasonable.

[bullzisnipr]

Nah, it's just like all things tech - just wait half a year and the price is very reasonable.

True, very true. I probably still wont be able to afford it, lol ;D only time will tell.

[fatcat]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/core2quad-q9300/crysys.png

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/core2quad-q9300/ut.png

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/core2quad-q9300/hl2.png

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/core2quad-q9300/wic.png

source (http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2quad-q9300_9.html#sect0)

[lemonlime]

I think you should definitely get the Phenom 9600 based on those charts ;)

I've been using an E8400 in my main rig for a while. Its an excellent gaming chip. The higher frequency and extra cache make it significantly quicker than the Q6600. When we get games that scale better on quads, the Q6600 may do better, but I don't think that will be anytime soon. It runs very cool and uses very little power. If you are feeling brave, most will overclock to 4GHz without much effort (no problem with the board you selected). You won't find many Q6600s that will hit 4GHz.

That heatsink looks familiar! :) It will do very well with an E8400.

[bullzisnipr]

If you are feeling brave, most will overclock to 4GHz without much effort (no problem with the board you selected). You won't find many Q6600s that will hit 4GHz.

Yea, the E8400 will certainly hit 4Ghz easily. Makes me wonder if I had a bad chip or somethin.. My E8400 I had barely got to 3.5 stable. That's the same motherboard that I can take my Q6600 to 3.4Ghz with. Had my 1066 ram running at 800 speeds, and all the recommended settings. I guess I just had a bad experience with E8400.

I certainly do not regret the change to Q6600 though..

[fatcat]

probably the main reason I went E8400

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/core2quad-q9300/power-2.png

[bullzisnipr]

In the area of power consumption, I can 100% understand your choice.

[fatcat]

just burning her in...

[Leonardo]

Looks good.
just burning her in...Interesting, that the phrase is right next to the eye catching avatar. :eek:

[fatcat]

Looks good.
Interesting, that the phrase is right next to the eye catching avatar. :eek:

fatcat's avatar of the month club!?... :vimp:

[fatcat]

ok orthos ran all night, no crash.

installing winXP 64-bit right now.

[fatcat]

so, just an FYI

had to do a 50mV vcore bump to the cpu to run stable 7x500. CPUZ shows 1.28v idle and 1.26v under load. Temps are 34c idle and 48c load. I could add fans or increase the rpm of the fans, but as it is, this system is very quiet, which is what I wanted to achieve.

happy camper i be

[Leonardo]

this system is very quiet My compliments. I always say I'm going to do that (quiet), but alas, rabid overclocking gets the best of me. Currently, I've got an Accelero S1 R2 on order for one of my 8800GTs that sounds like a water faucet run wild...passive GPU cooling!

Oh wait, this is about your computer, not mine. Really, glad you are meeting your goals. Good work! Feels good when it all comes together, doesn't it!

[jared]

Congrats. Now get that biznitch folding!

[Gargoyle]

3dmark that biznatch.

[mas0n]

so, just an FYI

had to do a 50mV vcore bump to the cpu to run stable 7x500. CPUZ shows 1.28v idle and 1.26v under load. Temps are 34c idle and 48c load. I could add fans or increase the rpm of the fans, but as it is, this system is very quiet, which is what I wanted to achieve.

happy camper i be

Grats! Fast AND quiet. That means you win.

:cheers:

[Leonardo]

Now get that biznitch folding!But of course, that is the bottom line.

[fatcat]

3dmark that biznatch.

~13k 3dmark06

[Leonardo]

~13k 3dmark06 Excellent!

PPD, Folding@Home GPU2 client plus WinSMP client..? :)

[fatcat]

so I finally picked a monitor...

Viewsonic VX2260wm (http://www.viewsonic.com/products/lcddisplays/xseries/VX2260wm/)

and got the Thrax approval of "ugliest monitor ever!"

;)

now someday I'll get some speakers

total with monitor is $968

[fatcat]

um, yea

[GnomeWizardd]

i like the monitor, viewsonic is top notch

[the_technocrat]

4Ghz :rarr:

[jared]

stable?

[fatcat]

stable?

yus

[mas0n]

nice

:cheers:

[Leonardo]

Brings a smile to my face! :)

[lemonlime]

The magical 4GHz.. good work, fatcat :cheers:

[primesuspect]

^5!

[RyderOCZ]

Oktoberfest overclocking :D :thumbup

[fatcat]

Oktoberfest overclocking :D :thumbup

yea, RyderOCZ is the man. He was like do that, this and bam! 4.0ghz and 500fsb. ^5 buddy